Ustat-the main reason behind success of baba culture

[shastarSingh]

22 minutes ago, shastarSingh said:

Only God and Guru Sahib ji are perfect.

Even an accomplished saint can make mistake.

Respect a true saint but only give space to ustat of Guru Sahibaan and Akal Purakh in your mind.

 

 

Bulx AMdir sBu ko ABulu gurU krqwru ]

bhulan a(n)dhar sabh ko abhul guroo karataar ||

Everyone makes mistakes; only the Guru and the Creator are infallible.

[Jacfsing2]

On 9/2/2021 at 4:13 AM, SSP said:

What people fail to understand is that there should be a difference between respecting someone who has guided you towards Gurbani, i.e. a spiritual person maybe a 'Sant' and following them rather than Gurbani.

Sikhi was colonised by the British and we are still following the colonised version rather than that given by our Gurus. We had no words like 'Priest for our Granthis, Holy book for the eternal Guru, Guru Granth Sahib ji l could go on.

From a theo-political perspective our Institutions and the general Sikh public have more faith in the Western concept of leadership, that is one person leads and all others follow, rather than the concept of collective leadership and panj pardani system. We believe in elections rather than selection. We believe in making decisions by voting rather than consensus.

We need to actively work to get back to basics.

True too many people compare the great Satguru to a book like the Bible or Quran. If their neech is this low, no wonder they are going to Pakhandi Babas to find spiritual gifts. 

[proudkaur21]

On 9/2/2021 at 4:13 AM, SSP said:

What people fail to understand is that there should be a difference between respecting someone who has guided you towards Gurbani, i.e. a spiritual person maybe a 'Sant' and following them rather than Gurbani.

Sikhi was colonised by the British and we are still following the colonised version rather than that given by our Gurus. We had no words like 'Priest for our Granthis, Holy book for the eternal Guru, Guru Granth Sahib ji l could go on.

From a theo-political perspective our Institutions and the general Sikh public have more faith in the Western concept of leadership, that is one person leads and all others follow, rather than the concept of collective leadership and panj pardani system. We believe in elections rather than selection. We believe in making decisions by voting rather than consensus.

We need to actively work to get back to basics.

yes but the thing is because we didn't get the chance to implement the sikh way of ruling most people dont know how it would be like and just assume they would be like the punjab politicians that we have currently. They also probably see the committee politics in gurudwaras and dont have much faith. I believe democracy is the biggest <banned word filter activated> because it gives power to the masses and then it causes issues for minorities when the majority dont have good interests for you.

[Premi5]

Just now, proudkaur21 said:

yes but the thing is because we didn't get the chance to implement the sikh way of ruling most people dont know how it would be like and just assume they would be like the punjab politicians that we have currently. They also probably see the committee politics in gurudwaras and dont have much faith. I believe democracy is the biggest <banned word filter activated> because it gives power to the masses and then it causes issues for minorities when the majority dont have good interests for you.

Autocracy can be just as bad towards minorities , no ?

[proudkaur21]

6 minutes ago, Premi5 said:

Autocracy can be just as bad towards minorities , no ?

I mean if we look at sikh theocracy it has always been just for the most part to people of all religions because we are not taught to subjugate people of other religions unlike certain global religions. I have full faith in sikhi and its rule because i know my people are not going out there kidnapping women of other religions, destroying places of worship of other religions, making life hell for people of other religions or letting people go hungry.

[shastarSingh]

On 11/7/2021 at 6:31 PM, shastarSingh said:

No doubt there are great gurmukhs and saints.

A true sant will never enjoy his own ustat.

He will inspire people to do ustat of the Great Guru and the Akal Purakh ji.

A true sant considers himself to be the lowest of all.

How can a true sant enjoy his own ustat?

How can a true sant tell his chellaas to put his ustat in the ears of the humanity?

[GurjantGnostic]

On 11/8/2021 at 6:30 AM, Premi5 said:

Autocracy can be just as bad towards minorities , no ?

Depending on the autocrat. 

Democracy gets subsumed too easily. 

[ipledgeblue]

On 8/31/2021 at 1:47 PM, shastarSingh said:

Almost all Sikhs know that nindiya is bad,very bad. But gurbani says that ustat is also bad.

Punjab is full of deraas. These dere vaalas do so much ustat of their "brahmgyani sant baba" that the people's head begins to bow for their sant baba.

Ustat is the main reason people get attached to deraas instead of Guru Sahib.

Sikhs shud be watchful against this ustat tactic of dere vaalas.

 

also watch out for groups of people which use the term gursikh for leaders and in a Sant equivalent.

Also Bhai Sahib is becoming more common, actually Dhadrianwaley used to be a Sant Baba and the changed his title to Bhai Ranjit Singh. I have no doubt there were bhai sahib leaders during Guru jis' times, but even this term is being abused probably for a century now.

 

Who knows, there's possibly other terms for various groups leaders and holy men as well.

[Not2Cool2Argue]

On 9/1/2021 at 8:40 AM, dallysingh101 said:

You should read this if you haven't before veer. It's informative. 

https://www.scribd.com/document/50691250/Bhai-Vir-Singh-s-editing-of-Panth-Prakash-by-Dr-Harinder-Singh-Chopra-Dr-Surjit-Hans

Do you disagree with the editing?

From what I've read so far, it seems beneficial. Like replacing word Hindu with Sikh. And removing references to chandi sacrifice.

Also bhangu was writing panth Prakash with a biased reason. To prove to gorey that Sikhs have claims to indian throne.  So he would make Sikhs seem totally hindu

Just because it is an old granth doesn't mean it is accurate. It certainly wasn't contemporary 

[dallysingh101]

51 minutes ago, Not2Cool2Argue said:

Do you disagree with the editing?

From what I've read so far, it seems beneficial. Like replacing word Hindu with Sikh. And removing references to chandi sacrifice.

Also bhangu was writing panth Prakash with a biased reason. To prove to gorey that Sikhs have claims to indian throne.  So he would make Sikhs seem totally hindu

Just because it is an old granth doesn't mean it is accurate. It certainly wasn't contemporary 

Personally speaking, I used to think just like you, but now I think rewriting an author's work and presenting it as the original is disgraceful and intellectually dishonest. By all means make comments on the contents in footnotes or explanatory essays and whatnot, and disagree with it wholeheartedly, but to project a piece of work as something it was not seems deviously deceptive. I'd want to know exactly what Rattan Singh Bhangu wrote and make my own opinion. We know that the word 'Hindu' never solely had a 'religious' definition previously, and that it also had a geographical definition i.e. any nonmuslim people living across the river Sindh/Indus(????), if certain people understood this simple thing, they wouldn't have had to go mental and start rewriting a Sikh classic because of some insecurity complex towards anglos. 

Removing references to rioting and looting was also disgraceful. Obviously done to please colonial patrons and not to encourage or remind Sikhs to act like their ancestors did with the mughuls, lest they started fighting to get their sovereignty back from the white invaders.

Bidhia Chand was also obviously 'too gangsta' for Bhai Vir Singh ji......  

Also he has issues with the humble (i.e. poor) backgrounds of many of the original Khalsa. 

I'd trust Bhangu on a lot more things than Bhai Vir Singh, who wrote a lot later, and that too when Panjab was subjugated. Bhangu also came from a line of fighters. But that doesn't mean I agree with everything Bhangu wrote, but I don't need some nanny type to hide the original text from me.